Vista be ******

[Urmas]

But then again, how does one support an "unsupportable" premise?

Wovon mann nicht sprechen kann, darüber muss mann schweigen --Wittgenstein

[epp_b]

Oi...your humor is too subtle for me. I don't get it

[Urmas]

The old cliché from Wittgenstein's Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus:"Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent." (Hope you enjoyed the audio. )

[redmaledeer]

I never thought I'd see philosophy set to music -- ethnically appropriate music too. Tom Lehrer did something like that for chemistry: He sang the periodic table.

[RandomBox]

Anyone find it strange that certain of our more strident Microsoft supporters have not chimed in?

Don't look at me I am just a pathetic sheep following the heard...

[Urmas]

I never thought I'd see philosophy set to music -- ethnically appropriate music too. Tom Lehrer did something like that for chemistry: He sang the periodic table.

Ethnically appropriate... M.A. Numminen appropriate?

While studying philosophy [at the University of Helsinki] M.A. Numminen had become acquainted with the famous Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus by philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein. This gave Numminen an idea: he wanted to expand his band's repertoire with his own material, so why not combine philosophy and music in order to do that. The World ls and ln Order to Tell are Numminen's first truly own compositions. They were made to the English version of Tractatus in 1966. The World Is employs rhythmic variation: the two opening bars are in 4/4 time, the next eight bars in 3/4 time, and the next four again in 4/4 time. The rhythmic A-part of ln Order to Tell is written in 8/8 time and major key, whereas the B-part is a melancholic waltz written in the minor key. Numminen composed four more songs, creating The Tractatus Suite. The fifth piece is a the keyless The General Form of a Truth-Function written for a soloist and a male choir. The suite had its premiere at the Turku Youth Festival in the fall of 1966. The same year Numminen composed Vihaisuushypoteesi ('The Anger Hypothesis') and Anomia ('Anomie'), two songs written to the texts of Erik Allardt, Numminen's sociology professor. Numminen also wrote a song to his own philosophical paper Jos jäsennämme (What Is?) from 1963.

Here's a rather more recent video clip... "Yes Sir I Can Boogie"... in (somewhat accented) German:

Lehrer... I'm pretty sure you all have seen this, but just in case:http://www.privatehand.com/flash/elements.html

[goretsky]

Hello,It is fairly easy to blame Microsoft for including new forms of DRM in Microsoft Windows Vista, but it seems Bill Gates is not particularly enthusiastic about it either, according to this blog entry. Just like any other software company, Microsoft has to add new features in updated versions of their products, that is a big selling point. One of the big selling points for Windows Vista is the richer experience people will be able to have with the new multimedia features over previous versions. Piracy is a very real issue to companies who are members of organizations like the MPAA and RIAA and it should not surprise anyone that associations like these see DRM as a major weapon in their arsenal against piracy.It seems to me that the DRM features in Windows Vista are the price Microsoft had to pay to get rights to make high definition media available in their new operating system from the organizations which are going to make that content available. I certainly doubt DRM is in the operating system because someone at Microsoft decided they wanted to make Windows Vista slower.Since this is all new, though, it is really hard to say what effect, if any, this has on the adoption of Windows Vista at launch. It will be very interesting, though, to see how things stand after the operating system has been out for a year.RegardsAryeh Goretsky

[Cluttermagnet]

DRM makes it all so hardware- and software- intensive, it is equivalent to the classical"...five men to screw in a light bulb-one to hold the bulb, four to turn the ladder..." :hysterical:Maybe the Chinese will indeed make simple 50 dollar set top players that just play this stuff, and nobody will want to spend thousands on cranky Vista systems to play multimedia. It is all quite mad, near as I can tell. And it will indeed ruin hardware, drivers, and software choices for a long time to come, piling all this DRM crap into every last widget that every factory turns out hereafter. Sooooo lame! Engineers had a cartoon depiction of this sort of Rube Goldberg scenario many years ago. Most of you have seen it- the widget designed by a committee- looks sort of like a three- pronged piano tuning fork with one of its legs disappearing into another dimension.

It is fairly easy to blame Microsoft for including new forms of DRM

Yeah? Did you read the entire, lengthy article, including footnotes and references? The author makes a strong point that Microsoft is the 800 pound gorilla here, not the Hooligan B*st*rds who are pushing DRM on everybody. All MS had to do was say no, and those clowns would have blinked and backed down. Nope, it's way more sinister- looking to many of us. Microsoft is in the process of locking it all down. They will own that entire high resolution media pipeline in the desktop PC, with zero competition from anyone else. Then they will be able to name their terms and set any price. It's called monopoly. They like to do that a lot...

[Charred]

Not just Vista. I just performed a search for DRM files in XP Home w/SP2 and came up with 124 files. Am I missing something or are these 'good' DRM files?

[zlim]

...good' DRM files

IMHO, I don't think there are any good DRM files. I'm running 2K and FF is my browser of choice. When i type in about:plugins , I get all these DRM files.High def DVDs coding has apparently been crackedhttp://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/01/technolo...p;partner=MYWAYSo I get the next step is to force Blu-Ray down everyone's throat.I see it as security "experts" versus hackers. One group will be ahead, so the other group will make more changes until that is cracked. Meanwhile, we the consumers get more confused trying to figure out what can play in what piece of hardware.

[lewmur]

IMHO, I don't think there are any good DRM files. I'm running 2K and FF is my browser of choice. When i type in about:plugins , I get all these DRM files.High def DVDs coding has apparently been crackedhttp://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/01/technolo...p;partner=MYWAYSo I get the next step is to force Blu-Ray down everyone's throat.I see it as security "experts" versus hackers. One group will be ahead, so the other group will make more changes until that is cracked. Meanwhile, we the consumers get more confused trying to figure out what can play in what piece of hardware.

http://discuss.extremetech.com/forums/1004...7/ShowPost.aspxMaybe there is a crack in their armour!!!!

[goretsky]

Hello,Yes, I did read the article. I am not disputing that there are very intricate DRM mechanisms in Microsoft Windows Vista, however, I do not agree with all of the author's conclusions, nor did I see any evidence that this technology was forced by Microsoft on to various computer and consumer electronics manufacturers and the entertainment industry.In this case, it seems to me the industry which has the most to gain from limiting the ability to duplicate digital content in Windows Vista is the latter. I certainly cannot come up with any reason why Microsoft would increase the complexity of their new operating system. Increasing complexity typically results in slower delivery of a product due to the increased engineering (development and testing) costs and you can still end up with some interesting non-usage scenarios even when all the devices are compliant with a specification due to differences in implementation by individual manufacturers. Again, I do not see what Microsoft would gain from such a move.From most consumers point of view, DRM is a non-issue: Plug and play, however, is not. Convenience, ease of use and availability is key here, and I can see the representatives of various entertainment industry cartels telling Microsoft that they would not provide high-definition digital content that works with Microsoft's next operating system unless Microsoft agreed to make it "impossible" for that content to be copied in the operating system. What I cannot see is any reason why Microsoft would approach those organizations and say, "We will only display high definition content from you if we are allowed to implement technical measures to prevent it from being duplicated." Keep in mind that while DRM is a technical issue, the reasons for its existance and usage are economic in nature. In situations like this, one has to ask who gains a competitive advantage or the most benefit from having technology like DRM implemented in the operating system? It seems to me the entity which benefits the most is the one which provides the compelling high-definition content.RegardsAryeh Goretsky

[Gary]

It seems to me the entity which benefits the most is the one which provides the compelling high-definition content.

It certainly is not the consumer.

[Cluttermagnet]

Yes, I did read the article. I am not disputing that there are very intricate DRM mechanisms ... From most consumers point of view, DRM is a non-issue: Plug and play, however, is not. Convenience, ease of use and availability is key here...

No, there's a lot more to it than that. The public is not quite the sheep you seem to be describing them as. At least not all of them. OK, perhaps some are 'sheep'. Many/most probably do care about a lot more than just 'convenience'. They also care whether or not they are allowed to use the material as they see fit, not being locked into crappy limitations, being able to 'port around' their legitimately purchased content and enjoy it as they wish to and not according to overly stringent, dictatorial mandates from money- grubbing control freaks! This need not, BTW, preclude reasonable 'anti- piracy' accommodations. We're talking about honest folks here, for gosh sakes, not even (gasp!) file sharing, let alone full blown piracy.

Keep in mind that while DRM is a technical issue, the reasons for its existance and usage are economic in nature. In situations like this, one has to ask who gains a competitive advantage or the most benefit from having technology like DRM implemented in the operating system? It seems to me the entity which benefits the most is the one which provides the compelling high-definition content.

Having not heard so much as one word about 'fair use' in your writings, you might understand that I suspect, for the moment, that you are non- sympathetic, or perhaps even covertly hostile to the consumer? Your writings don't make that clear one way or the other.

...I can see the representatives of various entertainment industry cartels telling Microsoft that they would not provide high-definition digital content that works with Microsoft's next operating system unless Microsoft agreed to make it "impossible" for that content to be copied in the operating system. What I cannot see is any reason why Microsoft would approach those organizations and say, "We will only display high definition content from you if we are allowed to implement technical measures to prevent it from being duplicated."

The content providers' agenda can be used to considerable advantage by MS. They did not start this particular argument (with the consumer), but they stand to benefit hugely from it. It appears they have embraced it fully. While public pronouncements of concern about the coming DRM trainwreck by representatives of MS are 'touching', they are far from convincing to me. I'm inclined to suspect some degree of covert zeal on the part of MS in embracing this anti- competitive, disabling tech.Oh, and did I mention "Bah! Humbug!" ? Edited January 3, 2007 by Cluttermagnet

[ross549]

No, there's a lot more to it than that. The public is not quite the sheep you seem to be describing them as. At least not all of them. OK, perhaps some are 'sheep'. Many/most probably do care about a lot more than just 'convenience'. They also care whether or not they are allowed to use the material as they see fit, not being locked into crappy limitations, being able to 'port around' their legitimately purchased content and enjoy it as they wish to and not according to overly stringent, dictatorial mandates from money- grubbing control freaks! This need not, BTW, preclude reasonable 'anti- piracy' accommodations. We're talking about honest folks here, for gosh sakes, not even (gasp!) file sharing, let alone full blown piracy.

Probably a more likely scenario: the public-at-large are probably unaware (in general) to the loss of fair use.I have a friend who had a mess of CDs stolen from his car. His solution? Download MP3s from P2P sites. He was going to do it anyway, so i made sure he had good AV and spyware protection on his computer, and that he used Firefox. So far, to his best knowledge, he has not been infected by any nasties in any way.Adam

[greengeek]

The usual Joe Average, Joe Public etc are not likely to be found here or most other tech sites. From what I saw of the public when I repaired pcs they are very much "sheep like".

[lewmur]

Keep in mind that while DRM is a technical issue, the reasons for its existance and usage are economic in nature. In situations like this, one has to ask who gains a competitive advantage or the most benefit from having technology like DRM implemented in the operating system? It seems to me the entity which benefits the most is the one which provides the compelling high-definition content.RegardsAryeh Goretsky

When it means Joe Public has to buy Vista in order to play their media, it is M$ that benifits.

[Guest LilBambi]

There are some interesting links that folks may be interested to read on this subject.I have included them in a posting at my BambisMusings blog here:http://www.bambismusings.com/?p=476

[Guest LilBambi]

And my blog posting on "Bill Gates On The Future Of DRM" here:http://www.bambismusings.com/?p=473

Gates said that no one is satisfied with the current state of DRM, which “causes too much pain for legitmate buyers” while trying to distinguish between legal and illegal uses. He says no one has done it right, yet. There are “huge problems” with DRM, he says, and “we need more flexible models, such as the ability to “buy an artist out for life” (not sure what he means). He also criticized DRM schemes that try to install intelligence in each copy so that it is device specific. His short term advice: “People should just buy a cd and rip it. You are legal then.”

[Guest LilBambi]

Interesting note in the NYTimes article that Liz posted:

If the person who identified himself as Muslix64 is able to create a complete version of a decryption program, or if others extend the software so that consumers without technical expertise can readily make copies of movies, that would create a crisis for the HD-DVD camp. That system contains a “revocation” mechanism for shutting down HD-DVD players whose encryption system has been compromised. But industry analysts say that taking such a step would give the HD-DVD system a tremendous black eye, angering consumers and shaking the confidence of Hollywood studios in the system.

Interesting. A Kill Switch. Which may be how they intend to lock out Linux users?

[RandomBox]

Interesting quote in the reply that LilBambi posted:

Interesting note in the NYTimes article that Liz posted:

...angering consumers and shaking the confidence of Hollywood studios in the system.

I am soooooo over Hollywood Hooligan B*st*rds. They are the origin for this whole schlomockery! I guess my future is not going to be in high definition!

[Cluttermagnet]

A fascinating discussion with Peter Gutmann, Steve Gibson, and Leo LaPorte on DRM and Vista here. Also a fascinating prior conversation between Steve and Leo last week here. You know what, guys- even sheep get angry if their DVD's won't play on their expensive computers. Especially if a 50 dollar Chinese set top player works just fine with the same disk. Read those two conversations closely. They are saying that DRM infects pretty much all hardware in the future because of what Vista is dictating here. It's quite an ugly mess, and I predict it will backfire on them greatly. I agree with the sentiments in the interview with Peter that this is going to serve to kickstart piracy greatly. And if I ever had even a shred of a desire to upgrade to the latest, greatest in computer platforms, what I now know about Vista has killed that desire totally. Read the discussions and see why Vista requires such intense hardware 'horsepower' to work (at all). It's sickening!Oh, yes, it will cut Linux out of a lot. Won't necessarily kill it, though. Might even make it look real good, by contrast. It all comes down to how much of a slave to hi def stuff you let them make you. And if you insist on having that capability on your computer or whether you'll settle for 'players' to perform that function. Me personally? VHS tapes are fine by me, but I don't waste all that much time watching anything on them anyway. The vast majority of the 'content' produced by the Hooligan B*st*rds is garbage, anyway.The most telling comments in the interview IMO- just think if MS had invested all this capital and effort in making computers more hacker resistant- to viruses and such- instead of wasting it protecting a bunch of virtual gangsters and their nice little obsolete 'profit center'.

Edited January 12, 2007 by Cluttermagnet

[Guest LilBambi]

Thanks Clutter, I have been doing so much reading on this over the last few years and this whole thing is very big ... it will affect all new hardware from companies in the consortium, the so called Trusted Computing Group (TCG):https://www.trustedcomputinggroup.org/homeMore info on my blog on some of this as well. Here's one of my most recent blog entries on this.The most important part for OS users of other platforms (such as Linux/BSD/UNIX/Mac), is that this AACS will affect any computer that comes in contact with Vista!So, users really need to be aware of that. Even Linux users and Mac users who make use of Vista even in a virtual environment could be affected by it even if Vista isn't their main OS on the computer, especially if they use the OEM drivers from any of the companies involved in TCG.This whole thing is a bit of a nightmare for users. Even Peter Guttman was abit scared of what is going into Vista and the repercussions to users.Users can be affected on so many levels it's frightening. If you buy hardware from a company that fails to pay their 'fees' or goes bankrupt, your purchased hardware could actually stop working at all!

[RandomBox]

...More info on my blog on some of this as well. Here's one of my most recent blog entries on this...

Nice blog entry but why be so nice by calling them "entertainment cartels" and really refer to them (MPAA, RIAA, et al) as what they really are about? I like calling them "Hooligan B*st*rds" but someone here had suggested the concept of "Hooligan B*st*rd Morons". :devil:It is too unfortunate that we could attempt to call them what they really are; yet the whole issue is a snafu and I am inclined to think that nothing we say or do is going to change matters one iota! The Hooligan B*st*rds don't wear rose colored glasses >> the color of their eyes is green... as in the dollar sign $$!

[Cluttermagnet]

This whole thing is a bit of a nightmare for users. Even Peter Guttman was a bit scared of what is going into Vista and the repercussions to users.Users can be affected on so many levels it's frightening. If you buy hardware from a company that fails to pay their 'fees' or goes bankrupt, your purchased hardware could actually stop working at all!

Thanks, LilBambi-The Register article was chilling, and not far off the mark, if at all. I wonder how many will 'get it', manage to have the foresight to not abandon their older hardware platforms as the lemmings leap? As the sheep herd, etc. I imagine almost no one at all 'gets it'. This thing is close to a done deal, near as I can tell. You'd think there would be at least a token 'popular outcry' on this thing. People fighting it like they did Net Neutrality'. I dunno. Hardly a ripple on this pond. Seems like a nightmarish remake of "Invasion of the Body Snatchers", redone as "Invasion of the Desktop System Kidnappers". Oh joy... :thumbsdown:I just can't tell you how much I'm appreciating the increasing value of all my old, 'obsolete' desktop hardware. It's not infected with their 'virus', and it can't be because it's too 'primitive' to have the electronic hardware/ software 'fangs' enabled to allow that to happen. The heck with their freak show and alleged 'content'. I don't want any part of it. Too bad it has to infect the future of the desktop to the point of essentially destroying the platform. Remember what the MS dude said in the past year or so (in oh, so many words)- they want to dumb down the desktop, ultimately turn it back into the dumb terminal it once was. They want to charge you monthly rent on everything. Between what the Hooligan B*st*rds of the 'content' industry are doing, along with MS, who 'owns the desktop', along with the 'owners of the pipes', along with all those sick, flaky spammers, along with all the spies/ control freaks among us, it's not pretty where the desktop computing experience is headed for... Something like "Smoking Crater Personal Computing Memorial Theme Park and Cobalt Testing Range"? Oh, and they'll charge a stiff price for parking and admission. Ahhh but it'll all be OK- I hear they'll let you rent time so you get to be with a family member at a very special discount during special promotions... Edited January 13, 2007 by Cluttermagnet

[RandomBox]

You {you may wish to} check out the Web site of Free Press, a national group working for media reform. The site, http://www.freepress.net, has all kinds of resources for learning more and taking action to improve the media system. You can sign up as an activist with Free Press and offer your opinion to decision makers on key issues.The discussion about "Who Owns the Media" maybe more fodder for "our" cannons! Especially, since this whole DRM issue is not just about MicroSoft/WinVista and/or the Hooligan B*st*rds but also includes those who we have elected to serve us... err... corporate intere$t$!

[Guest LilBambi]

Well said Clutter and RandomBox and thanks for the kind words and on posting freepress.net's site and that page in particular! I hadn't seen that one yet. Will come in handy for our show tonight. :thumbsup:There are other places that shows the futility of DRM, particularly AACS and their scheme of blacklisting, etc.:http://www.freedom-to-tinker.comhttp://www.eff.org/deeplinks/archives/00315.phpAnd it's aways good to re-read Cory Doctorow's DRM talk (to Microsoft as well to see how frustrating it is to know they have gone down this road after the Darknet papers and having invited Cory to talk on this issue years ago. *sigh*I have Cory's DRM Talk on my blog (http://www.bambismusings.com) link right under the header.It always comes down to a big mess for the consumer and will do nothing to thwart the bad guys. It's sad.

[RandomBox]

.

Edited January 13, 2007 by RandomBox

[Guest LilBambi]

A fascinating discussion with Peter Gutmann, Steve Gibson, and Leo LaPorte on DRM and Vista here. Also a fascinating prior conversation between Steve and Leo last week here.

Steve and Leo continued this discussion in the most recent #75 episode here.I listened to all three in one sitting to get the continuity between them and it's quite telling.

[Guest LilBambi]

Interesting article at The Register: Microsoft: yes, we have no incompatibilitiesFrom the article:

The first instance refers to incompatibilities between Microsoft's Windows 386, 3.x and Windows 95 products and DR-DOS. This was an operating system developed by Digital Research, and later acquired by Novell, which was 100 per cent compatible with Microsoft's MS-DOS. Thanks to citizens in Iowa, who are pursuing a consumer class action lawsuit against Microsoft, these ancient malpractices are being aired once again, and Microsoft executives have been on the stand in Des Moines defending the company's conduct.Microsoft wanted users to believe that interoperability between DR-DOS and Windows was problematic.The second instance refers to incompatibilities between Windows Vista and next-generation High Definition DVDs, BluRay and HD-DVD. The incompatibilities are deliberate, and part of the specification Microsoft gave hardware manufacturers so they could design Vista-compatible hardware. Just before Christmas, Peter Gutmann published a technical analysis of the Vista incompatibilities, listed some of the potential security and stability threats they posed, and some of the situations were they might cause real harm.In this instance, while Microsoft has gone to great lengths to booby trap its software to disable functionality when certain media discs are being played and to degrade performance when it finds what it thinks is counterfeit media, or "unauthorized" copying - it wants us to believe this will not have serious consequences for users.(Until Vista is tested in real world conditions, we won't know for sure if Gutmann's claims are alarmist and Microsoft is telling the truth, or not - or somewhere in between.)